Tag Archives: even the greatest of the great minds

“It is not the strongest or the most intelligent who will survive but those who can best manage change.”

―

Leon C. Megginson

=============

“We’ll never survive!”

“Nonsense. You’re only saying that because no one ever has.”

―

The Princess Bride

==============

Ok.

Multiethnic People Forming Circle and Innovation Concept

Business can look a lot like war … well … at least the battles portion. That said … it seems like one could take some lessons from the military at the same time.

Today’s thought is about who you surround yourself with.

Business is rarely, let’s say maybe 90% of the time, not an individual effort but rather a team/group effort.

I dug around in notes I have jotted down and found a thought I had scribbled down, an almost verbatim thought from someone I respect, and consider a good friend, a Christian military veteran who received 12 decorations in 2 tours in Vietnam <including several Purple Hearts>:

“I am fairly sure I served with heathens, homosexuals and a number of others who my faith would consider sinners. I do know that being in the field highlights the flaws & sins of everyone which, in an odd way, brought us together as flawed Marines trying to survive. But, out there, there really was only one line, one distinction: those who were smart enough to help you stay alive and those who were stupid enough to get you killed. Nothing else mattered.”

The main thought?

“Smart enough to help you stay alive and stupid enough to get you killed.”

To be clear.

This doesn’t really mean someone intellectually or educated smart versus some less-than-intellectual “stupid’ person. This is about the ones who have the smarts & savviness to be alert to the things that need to be done, and can do them, to survive versus the ones who can be oblivious to the things that can kill you <and a shitload of faux intellectuals fall into the latter camp>.

That said.

That pretty much summarizes the business world.

Insert “idea” and … well … there you go … “smart enough to help your ideas stay alive and stupid enough to get your ideas killed.”

<I imagine I could also suggest the thought works for getting fired too>

The point is, in business, if you have any desire to do good things you know you will not be able to do it alone and you learn pretty quickly who you want around you … especially when bullets start flying.

You don’t care if they are black, white, yellow, green or any Crayola color you can think of.

You don’t care if they are gay, straight, lesbian, Furrie, zygote or a transgender.

You don’t care if they are Muslim, Jewish, atheist, pray to Zeus, Christian or Buddhist.

All you care about is surrounding yourself with those offering the highest likelihood of survival. You also care about insuring those around you represent the skills and savviness needed for survival.

Look.

Business certainly has aspects of battle and military strategy.

Especially so if you think about ideas and having winning ideas. The metaphor seems appropriate because good ideas, shit … even great ideas, do not “win the day” all on their own. 99% of the time they need to battle their way through a variety of well-placed and ill placed obstacles.

I think I was really lucky that I learned this lesson very early in my career.

I learned by watching others, who had good ideas, champion them alone seeking persona glory … and watching a good idea die.

I learned by championing what I thought were good ideas with the wrong people … and watching a good idea die.

I learned by watching others, who had a good idea and a good team, champion an idea and defend it, fight for it and see it stand at the end … alive & kicking.

My sense is that this learning affected how I hired people when I was a group leader. I wanted people who had ideas and who wanted to champion ideas and who was willing to set aside some personal glory for the sake of insuring the idea didn’t die.

Anyway.

I know many military people but have never been in the military.

I imagine when you are on the battlefield you are standing as close to the one who can shoot the straightest and will shoot when needed … regardless of whether they look like me or not.

I imagine when you are on the battlefield you are more likely to be saying to your fellow soldier … “stay away from Jack, he is one crazy motherfucker and is gonna get us killed” than worrying about whether some person has some quirk, or looks funny or lusts after Little Ponies when they go home at night.

I would suggest that survival, in general, has a nasty habit of eliminating distractions and having you focus on ‘who can do the job.”

I would suggest that if you care about ideas in business that survival of your ideas, in general, has a nasty habit of eliminating distractions and having you end up focusing on “who can do the job.”

I admit.

As a person I don’t get racism, I don’t get xenophobia, I don’t get discrimination, I don’t get any of that stuff. I just think anyone who gets caught up in all that is caught up in some bullshit. And bullshit has no place if you are interested in progress … let alone surviving.

I admit.

As a business person I don’t get racism, I don’t get xenophobia, I don’t get discrimination, I don’t get any of that stuff. I just think anyone who gets caught up in all that is caught up in some bullshit. And bullshit has no place if you are interested in the progress of your ideas … let alone the survival of your ideas.

I admit.

If you want to succeed in business … well … there really is only one line, one distinction: those who are smart enough to help you stay alive and those who are stupid enough to get you killed. Nothing else matters.

“Ninety percent of paid work is time-wasting crap. The world gets by on the other ten.”

―

John Derbyshire

We Are Doomed: Reclaiming Conservative Pessimism

================

Well.

How many times have we sat back and said “I can do that job”?

Now.

To be clear.

I am going to talk about this from a business-to-business perspective and not the corner of the bar-to-‘a job’ perspective. That because from the corner of the bar, after a couple of beers, any of us can do any job better than the person who is currently doing it.

This is an “I have been in the workplace, I feel like I have had some success and … well … shit … I can do that job” perspective.

OK … I am chuckling a little, c’mon, let’s face it, I don’t care who you are and where you have worked you have eyed what another person is doing and thought you could do it. At some point, if you have had some success, all jobs start having some commodity-like characteristics which tease you into believing shifting from one to another just isn’t that difficult.

Ok.

To be fair.

I have never lacked in business confidence. I do not believe there is a business problem that cannot be solved and I also believe <with some realistic pragmatic goggles on> that there is not a problem I cannot solve if I hunker down and get all the information I need. This can make me aggravating to work with on occasion because … well … I make no apologies for “how I may repair things”.

But that shouldn’t be confused with believing I can do any job.

Ok.

Yeah.

I admit.

I am certainly guilty at points in my career where I have certainly thought “I could do that job” over a wide array of responsibilities and unrelated industries.

Note. I rarely thought I could do it better … just that I could do it.

……….. my MBA at Wake Forest experience ………..

I would say that my MBA experience, a great experience with great professors at Wake Forest, encouraged me to think this way. It was a case study program which inherently encouraged thinking skills over black & white discipline skills.

I tend to believe a good MBA program insures you know enough about a specific discipline to be … well … dangerous if you overestimate your own knowledge but effective enough to be able to understand the discipline to apply it in a general management scope.

Now.

In general, I think this attitude, on the positive side, permits you to make the leaps you have to make to jump into new jobs, new responsibilities and new positions.

In general, I think this attitude, on the negative side, can make you overlook some skills other people have as well as … at its worst … can put you in positions in which you will fail in a spectacular fashion.

I imagine as someone gets promoted, as I did, every step up showed me that there was a shitload I didn’t know overall, as well as about the responsibilities of a specific job, but at the same time it also continuously reinforced that I could … well … “do that job.”

Success in business is a double edged sword.

Conversely.

………. what you know versus what you do not know ………

As someone gets promoted they also can see that some people got their jobs not because they necessarily had the experience or skills for the job but simply because they had the appearance they could do the job.

You watched as these people invested gobs of energy trying to “fake it until they actually make it” or, worse, they realized they were in over their heads and invested even more energy simply maintaining a facade of bullshit to hide their hollowness.

I would also note that given your experience on the last thing I just shared that also encourages someone to believe they could … well … “do that job.”

The higher I got and the broader my experiences, my sense of “I cannot really do that job” increased with regard toward … well … the jobs I really shouldn’t do. It didn’t diminish my sense of ability to handle increased responsibility it simply made me more reflective of other skill sets and the reality of certain jobs.

To be clear.

There is a certain group of people who never reach this realization … they tend to be either sociopaths or oblivious narcissists … but they do exist.

Anyway.

My real realization on this topic came when I reached a general management position <and did some consulting>.

It was there that I recognized jobs are like icebergs.

90% of a job you never see until you actually do the job. And to successfully do the part you don’t see needs a couple of things … beyond the obvious ‘I need to be competent with regard to the specific skill itself’ aspect:

Attitude alignment

This attitude goes way beyond the simplistic “I can do the job.”

This attitude is more with regard to what you are actually good at.

As I have stated before I am more a renovator than a builder. That is a mindset. My attitude is just put me in a room with all the puzzle pieces and I can rearrange them, maybe polish off a couple, maybe smooth out some edges that no longer fit well … and put a different puzzle together that works better than the one that exists.

And then there are people who say ‘I envision a puzzle and build the pieces.”

Those are two different attitudes that, certainly, have some overlap but also, certainly, drive a different type of style and ability to succeed in one type of job versus another type of job. I believe many people are successful in their jobs, and new jobs, because they have the proper insight into themselves and position themselves well to take advantage of this insight.

I would also add that a leader who can see within a person’s ‘skill set’ to recognize this attitude will also be the type who can hire incredibly effectively.

Not all leaders and hirers can. some simply see the façade and surface abilities and believe they are easily transferable and … well … hire them believing anyone can do the job if they have that appearance of a type of surface skill set.

The less-than-obvious skill set

… example of under the radar understanding (Juran Institute) …

Each skill, each specialty, has layers to its depth & breadth. Let’s say this is the “art” of the skill <I sometimes refer to it as “the shadow of your skill”>.

When you are a junior person you are demanded day in and day out to craft your pragmatic ‘non-artistic’ skills. You learn how to screw screws into holes efficiently and hammer nails into their proper places effectively.

As you gain seniority you are demanded to start incorporating the art aspects of your craft. I like to explain this as you have to learn to be more of an architect of your department, skill and specialty. By the way … not everyone can do his and not every department head is good at this and it tends to start filtering out those who move on to the next level … general management.

And if you move up even more into general management you are demanded to gain some skills in the “art” of combining all the skills into the overall progress of a company beyond the simplistic “are each department doing their fucking job.”

In general the biggest difference between thinking you can do a job and actually being able to do the job is your less than obvious skill set. For example … I cannot tell you how many times I have sat in a conference room with a CFO who has displayed a skill set that … well … made me think “shit, this company is lucky to have them” not because they knew all the accounting mumbo jumbo but because they knew how to wield account skills in ways that the company benefited beyond accounting.

Pick your C-level title and I would say the same thing.

At the corner of the bar you have no clue whether you have this less than obvious skill set and if you actually have the experience you may only have a sense of whether this skill set exists. This is an intangible, however, 90% of the time this intangible arises from some relevant experience <maybe not within that specific discipline but a discipline nonetheless> … so your experience does matter.

So.

I decided to write about this today because, frankly, we have a president who believes anyone can do any job and keeps hiring people who may be smart <and may not be … because I, frankly, question whether the President is smart> for positions they have no or little qualifications for that position.

I decided to write about this today because, frankly, as a business guy I know you cannot do a job simply because you say “I can do that job” and that experience really does matter and that simply because you believe something … <sigh> … does not make it so.

I will say that I have learned this lesson the hard way and it permits me to be able to call a bullshitter a bullshitter and to be able to point out that some roles & responsibilities dictate at least some relevant experience in order to be effective & efficient.

Just because you think you can “do that job” does not mean you can actually “do that job.” It takes some self-awareness to know that.

The lack of self-awareness has a ripple effect.

In a bar your lack of self-awareness can create a range of responses – some chuckles, out right laughter of disbelief and maybe even some aggravation if it inches into what some of the people actually do sitting at the table.

In a business your lack of self-awareness can create … well … some real business repercussions. Not only may you be out of your depth but you may actually start making some poor hires who are also out of their depth and … well … that kind of shit gathers negative momentum <down the slippery slope of less-than-competent results>.

In business you get fired for that shit.

In a presidency your lack of self-awareness can create some real country repercussions – and we are seeing some of that lack of effectiveness now.

“How many people long for that “past, simpler, and better world,” I wonder, without ever recognizing the truth that perhaps it was they who were simpler and better, and not the world about them?”

–

R.A. Salvatore

===========

“There is a trail of existence that follows everyone, threads of life that people spin out and leave behind wherever they go. Threads cross all the time. Threads cross and cross again – time and place if in no other way – even when the people appear unaware of each other. No one pays attention to others around them unless the overlap happens again. Sometimes, people miss each other only by a few seconds, yet they are connected.

Sometimes place is the reason for the overlap but time is not. Sometimes the overlap is purposeful other times happenstance.

The threads are there, no matter. Ah. When they glow, they are one destiny.”

–

Inspector O

========================

So.

In general, 95+% of us think the past was simpler … or … let’s say we think it was less tangled.

In general, 95+% of us view the present as complicated, complex and peppered with shit we never had to deal with in the past … in other words … a tangled mess.

Maybe we should vie it differently.

Maybe we should view us, the individual, as more complicated, more complex and more peppered with shit than we were in the past.

Maybe we have forgotten the past when we did what we felt was right versus wrong & what felt good and not bad without getting tangled up in a whole bunch of … well … things Life whispers and shouts into our ear.

Maybe it isn’t Life that is more complex … it is us … we are tangled up.

Now.

In my eyes … life has a nasty habit of getting us all tangled up.

I will not say “confuse us” it more likely just twists us pretzel-like between suggesting right things to do, wrong things to do, right ways to do, wrong ways to do and … well … what you are supposed to like versus what you actually do like.

All of this tangling makes us view the world as the villain <or the ‘tangler’ as it were>.

Wrong.

Stop for a second and admit that about maybe we are the ‘tangler.’

Why do I say that?

The world is what it is. We either respond to the world or we don’t.

We either accommodate the world or we don’t.

We do everything the world suggests or we don’t.

I say that because Life is indifferent to us. It chugs along in a fairly consistently inconsistent way in that it remains linear while everyone crisscrosses each other, all the experiences and moments crisscross, and good decisions and bad decisions made by everyone crisscross … meaning that all of that gets tangled up … in every moment.

The more people we meet … the more paths & branches crisscross … and cross again.

It becomes a tangled confusion of so many choices and paths and interlinked branches it becomes easy to think of it all as chaos.

Especially if you think of people and events as threads and not dots in a moment in time.

Yeah.

As your path crosses with others … others who are also making choices … choices of strangers, family, friends, enemies, whomever … their choices do affect our path. And then we walk in to this multidimensional space bombarded with molecules of other’s choices and contextual environment situational type stuff and … uhm … we have to make a choice.

And that is where we really get all tangled up.

While, yes, we have to make a shitload of ongoing choices … small and large and every size in between … the majority of them we make more difficult than we have to. this most often happens with good intentions in that we try and figure out the “best” choice <in the midst of all this chaos swirling around us> and we … well … overthink.

Then it gets worse.

We look to the past and it appears to be a neat set of choices made … and not made. It often appears in a nice schematic of context in which we simplistically made some choice based on what we saw and experienced.

Oh <nuts>.

The reality is that we made some choice in some situation which looked a shitload like what it does in the present <and what most likely looks like the future> … it appears to look a lot like sheer chaos — a snarled thread of paths and choices.

Oh <shit>.

We get all tangled up.

Okay.

Let me try and help.

In each tangled chaotic web of events, threads and paths … everything is actually bounded by the practical — the practical aspect of what you can actually do … and cannot do … within the choices you make.

This is the actual reality of what can be done.

This is simplicity.

This is the untangled you.

And if you actually untangle you will find some really good decisions and choices available for you. I am not suggesting it will make the repercussions black & white but … well … shit … I do not believe our Life, or destiny, is pre-ordained in a black & white definition anyway. I tend to believe Life is just a huge map of possibilities in which you kind of forge your way through a relatively chaotic Life by being the best tangled you.

Look.

I like … no … love the thought that we get tugged by duty <right thing to do> versus desire <some type of self-gratification … spanning from full indulgence to full altruism> as we make all these choices.

And while we certainly can be impacted by others or ‘things out of our control’ … what remains in our control, always, is the untangled choice.

The choice to do what we may with the circumstances at hand.

The choice remains with us.

The time, the moment, demands one thing … to tangle or untangle.

Choose to untangle yourself .. it will most likely make you better and simpler.

———————————–

Alvin Toffler thought:

Two apparently contrasting images of the future grip the popular imagination today. Most people to the extent that they bother to think about the future at all … assume the world they know will last indefinitely. They find it difficult to Imagine a truly different way of life for themselves, let alone a totally new civilization. Of course they recognize that things are changing. But they assume today’s changes will somehow pass them by and that nothing will shake the familiar economic framework and political structure. They confidently expect the future to continue the present.

This straight-line thinking comes in various packages. At one level it appears as an unexamined assumption lying behind the decisions of businessmen, teachers, parents, and politicians. At a more sophisticated level it comes dressed up hi statistics, computerized data, and forecasters jargon.

Either way it adds up to a vision of a future world that is essentially “more of the same.”

It ministers to some great need, it performs some great service, not for itself, but for others…or failing therein, it ceases to be profitable and ceases to exist.”

–

Calvin Coolidge

==================

“Let’s be honest. There’s not a business anywhere that is without problems. Business is complicated and imperfect. Every business everywhere is staffed with imperfect human beings and exists by providing a product or service to other imperfect human beings.”

–

Bob Parsons

=========================

On Bastille Day it seems appropriate to take a minute and discuss “fraternite” in business.

Yeah.

Today is the French National Day, the 14th of July, or … le 14 juillet.

By the way … nobody in France calls it Bastille Day <that is a creation of the American mind>. The French are celebrating what is called Fête de la Fédération <the National Celebration> and commonly Le quatorze juillet <the fourteenth of July>. The national holiday is about national pride: the national bleu-blanc-rouge flag and the French values of Liberté, Fraternité and Egalité.

French for “liberty, equality, fraternity <brotherhood>” … the national motto of France

Regardless.

Inevitably a great organization exhibits both efficient AND effective progress.

What typically creates that combination is part discipline, part structure, part leadership … all glued together by “fraternité”.

That ‘glue’ is most often discussed in the American business world as ‘a vision’ or maybe ‘a purpose’. We do so because we Americans hate any kind of lack of specificity. But the truth is that the most common bond of a great organization is a more nebulous concept … one of “fraternité”.

Or.

“Any man aspires to liberty, to equality, but he cannot achieve it without the assistance of other men, without fraternity.”

(Napoleon)

Oddly enough, while this sounds relatively common sense, I kind of feel like business itself needs a revolution to overturn the current thinking to accommodate what should be common sense.

What do I mean?

Current business is kind of in a wacky spot.

It talks a lot about vision and purpose as if they are “things” … like maybe a lighthouse anyone can see as they bob around the chaotic sea of business life to find a way home.

By the way … I would argue that is a very individualistic thought — “I can find my way home” type thought – and not really a team thought <but that could quite easily be debated>.

Regardless.

Fraternity is more like “everyone not only knowing what they need to do to keep the ship afloat but actually pitching in whether needed or not because they love the ship itself.”

That may sound like some wacky nuance but I have to warn people that revolutions can kind of gain some momentum off of some fairly wacky things on occasion.

And, by the way, that is a more nebulous “I feel this way” aspect of organizational culture and, as noted many times, if it cannot be measured or indexed or scored … most older leaders into today’s business just don’t like that kind of shit.

Anyway.

Not to beat this metaphor to death but I do believe we need a semi-revolution in the way business organizations are created and run and managed.

I think we may need that revolution because “fraternité” just ain’t the way business is run as a core principle. And, yes, it should be viewed as a “core” principle because … uhm … when discipline falls apart, when structure falls apart, when leadership falls apart … what keeps you on the battlefield and fighting is … yeah … “fraternité.”

On a bigger organizational level I worry about how an idea like this is getting suffocated by generational issues <younger people desire something and older people think they know the best> and maybe an outcome-is-the-only-thing-that-matters versus a belief business should incorporate altruistic aspects.

Both of those conflicts are HUGE issues. Issues I have written about in 1200+ word thought pieces … individually.

I actually believe we need some revolutionary thinking on the latter mre than the former.

To me we have a bunch of people who look at business and turn away because … well … I fear that they only believe they can change the world through more altruistic pursuits and not traditional business.

And, yes, they are important and good pursuits … but from a larger perspective … business drives the world. Business makes shit that makes lives easier and healthier and impacts the home and life in ways that it is difficult to imagine let alone outline in a few words.

Somehow … someway … we need to insert the ‘believers of principles’ into the business world with all of their ambition and hope … and remind them – and empower them – that they can change the world.

That they can make the world a better place.

They can make society and people and lives better.

And they can do it in business … not just altruistic career opportunities.

And if we do that … and do that well … I tend o believe we will build more organizations driven at its core by a sense of “fraternité” rather than a bunch of documents setting out some guiding principles, vision and purpose which everyone says “okay … let’s do that.”

It is quite possible that I am talking about ‘the soul’ of an organization.

What I do know is that … well … read the following quote:

====================

“I have found no greater satisfaction than achieving success through honest dealing and strict adherence to the view that, for you to gain, those you deal with should gain as well.”

–

Alan Greenspan

===============================

I do believe we need to be drawing some lines in business. And I don’t mean company handbook type lines or even some well-crafted ‘lines’ in “how we conduct our business” or “who we are” but maybe they are more lines with regard to some unwritten principles.

I say that because when you can gather a group of people together who share a strong set of principles … well … they will walk straight into a hail of bullets to not only survive but to get good shit done.

==========

“Morality, like art, means drawing a line someplace.

–

Oscar Wilde

===========

Now.

Business absolutely makes dealing with your principles a constant struggle. It can kind of suffocate your principles in between the pragmatic aspects of getting shit done <discipline & structure> and the faux burden of some vision or grander purpose which “you know is important to us therefore it should be important to you.”

Frankly, when suffocated by these bookends you don’t have a lot of elbow room for any type of true, intangible, unsolicited camaraderie.

The fraternité is more forced than natural.

And when it is not natural it is not as strong.

Fraternité in business.

I believe we have forgotten this.

And while I do believe many of us have forgotten how to draw lines with regard to our principles I tend to believe business, in general, has simply decided to just draw lines <in a box in fact> and say “there you go” … there are your principles and rules for comraderie.

That is kind of whack.

Look.

I can honestly tell you that being a senior leader in a business and organization you like <you do not have to love> may be one of the greatest experiences anyone can ever have. And what makes that experience truly great is when you are fortunate enough to foster something intangible, something that really cannot be measured, and something which doesn’t earn you some performance bonus at the end of the year … it is when you stumble upon the sense of fraternité.

I am sure some organizational guru will send me a link to “steps to build a fraternité organization” and … well … good for them. I tend to believe this is one of those soul aspects, intangible things, that is created less by some “how to” guide or some formula and more by simple good intentions combined with some good discipline, construct and leadership.

This is what I thought about today, July 14th, as I thought about the national motto of France “liberty, equality, fraternity <brotherhood>”.

With that I imagine I should end with where I began … no enterprise can exist for itself alone. That is the foundation for … well … a fraternité organization.

“Maybe growing up was really nothing more than growing away: from your old life, from your old self, from all those things that kept you tethered to your past.”

—-

Jennifer E. Smith

================

Forever is a long, long time.

And has a way of changing things.

—-

The Fox and the Hound

========================

Ok.

Forever.

Forever is about time and it isn’t. What I mean is we associate forever with time and, yet, it is timeless so time … in a slightly absurd twist of truth … is almost irrelevant to ‘forever.’

But.

We always associate Forever with a long, long time.

And time is a funny thing.

It can ebb and flow all within a finite amount of time.

It can increase speed and decrease speed and yet remain an extremely identifiable finite amount of time.

It can take years of asking and creating questions … and a second to answer everything.

Forever is all of that and more.

That said.

While I think we get better with the concept of forever as we get older I am fairly sure we don’t really realize how vast forever is.

And what I mean by that is it seemingly contains everything and, yet, all of a sudden … we realize that we will not last forever and it runs the risk of containing … uh oh … nothing.

Yeah.

Basically, being the type of outcome oriented people we are; we actually try and apply some measurement to forever.

Yeah.

But think about it.

Forever is everything until it is nothing.

Forever is hope until it is emptied of everything … and hope no longer exists.

All that said.

I, personally, wish the word didn’t exist. To me it captures everything bad about false hope and, therefore, provides a nice well wrapped excuse for us to not face what Emerson suggests “God offers to every mind its choice between truth & repose. Take which you please – you can never have both.”

The whole idea of forever far too often tethers us to our past or inertia. Neither of which is very productive.

While I do believe growing up, for those who do actually grow up, is more like growing away … or unlearning shit … I also believe growing up, more often than not, is growing away from the belief in forever.

In other words … we grow away from infiniteness and grow closer to an understanding of finiteness.

I actually don’t think that is a bad thing. It most likely actually helps us live Life a little better and maybe even manage Life choices and behavior a little better.

==============

“Let me tell you a truth … no matter what choice you make, it doesn’t define you.

Not forever.

People can make bad choices and change their minds and hearts and do good things later; just as people can make good choices and then turn around and walk a bad path. No choice we make lasts our whole life. If there’s ever a choice you’ve made that you no longer agree with, you can make another choice.”

–

Jonathan Maberry

============

Look.

Life is a mixed bag of contradictory events, outcomes and feelings all of which can careen through your Life with wild abandon like a bunch of bulls in your china shop.

This means in assessing forever it really isn’t like assessing a balance sheet but more like trying to judge a handful of marbles rolling around a tilting table.

The good news on that is, more often than not, bad shit is not indicative of Life Armageddon and good shit is not indicative of future ongoing bliss.

Forever is simply an endless array of moments crashing into each other and away from each other in which present moments look bigger than they truly are and then … well …than we have another moment.

And another.

And, well, another.

Until we don’t have any moments left.

And in the end we most likely look back at all the moments in what we deemed our forever and if we are lucky, and did things the best we could whenever we could, we most likely see that our forever is filled with somethings that don’t look too bad.

I sometimes believe this is a lesson learned of experience.

That said.

Forever is an empty concept.

It can only be filled if you actively fill it with something. you have to choose between truth or repose … you cannot have both.

Anyway.

Here is what I do know about forever.

It doesn’t really exist to an everyday schmuck like me and my Life. It only exists in the minds of astrophysicist and … well … smart intellectual types in some theoretical way.

Time is finite in everyday Life and that reality smacks us in the face each and every day. It is a reality in which we tend to define forever in terms of minutes not eons.

Sure.

Everyday schmucks like me love the idea of forever <on some things>… and hate the idea of forever <on some things> … and constantly misapply the idea of forever to our time and, yet, all the while do our best to fucking kill the concept of forever in tiny scraps of time … choice by choice.

But I would argue until … well … my forever is done … that thinking about anything in terms of forever is a fool’s errand. It is foolish because if you think you have forever you will most likely remain tethered to the past and, well, forever is most likely best explored by growing up by growing away.

“We are tossed about by external causes in many ways, and like waves driven by contrary winds, we waver and are unconscious of the issue and our fate.’

We think we are most ourselves when we are most passionate, whereas it is then we are most passive, caught in some ancestral torrent of impulse or feeling, and swept on to a precipitate reaction which meets only part of the situation because without thought only part of a situation can be perceived.”

―

Will Durant

====================

“Trust yourself. Create the kind of self that you will be happy to live with all your life.

Make the most of yourself by fanning the tiny, inner sparks of possibility into flames of achievement.”

—-

Golda Meir

============================

So.

It would be an understatement to say that the number of ways a leader can lead are so numerous it would most likely take a book to explain them all <and people have certainly tried>. Trying to simplistically suggest “this is the way to lead” is … well … simplistic tripe.

It would be an understatement to say that the number of ways a leader can articulate an idea for people to rally around and follow are so numerous it would most likely take a book to explain them all <and people have certainly tried>. Trying to simplistically suggest “this is the way to share ideas in a meaningful way” is … well … simplistic tripe.

That said.

Today I will talk about leaders and ideas and articulating ideas … let’s call it “the business idea” leadership challenge.

For those of us who have had the fortune, or misfortune, of walking the halls of management in business we have all crossed paths with all the scary tactics and rhetoric associated with leaders who cannot articulate an idea if they actually tried <and most do try>.

These are the leaders who do not really have the ability to articulate an idea well enough for the idea to gain traction and be implemented.

……………….. the idea ………………….

I sometimes believe what makes a good leader is the ability to articulate an idea so that <a> people can grasp it, <b> people can envision it as “something” tangible enough to want to hold it and <c> people can attach some emotional connection to it <ranging from ‘I believe’ to ‘passion’>. But many leaders just struggle with idea articulation and use a variety of tricks to present an idea in a way that encourages people to … well … believe in the idea.

To be clear.

This is more a discussion of the psychology of managing employees … let’s call it “believing management” more so than motivating employees.

This is more about unlocking employees – unlocking potential. I mention potential because that is what ideas do … they are like a powerful chip inserted into people which energizes, focuses and drives individuals <and inevitably the organization itself>.

And because of all of what I just said there are a variety of ways to create some energy behind ‘believing’ in an idea.

Us versus them.

War analogies wherein those who don’t believe in our idea are ‘enemies.’

The narrative behind the idea always seems to have a “good versus evil” aspect.

Two thoughts on that.

Selective tactical ‘good versus evil’ leadership is appropriate. Sometimes you need to give an organization some “oomph” <a technical organizational behavior term> and this is an easy way to create some energy around the idea.

Being reliant on “us versus them” narrative is lazy leadership. Yes. Counterpoints always provide some contrast which permits some clarity, however, an idea should be able to stand on a blank page in a blinding spotlight and create enough ‘belief’ in that idea that people will want to fill the blank white space simply because they want to … they choose to … not because they ‘have to.’

Bad leaders misunderstand leading with an idea.

They always feel like they have to have an enemy which the idea has to slay. Or they feel like they have to divide so that their idea looks bigger.

They have it wrong. And dangerously wrong.

Good ideas power up on their own. Good ideas have a size to stand up to … well … any size idea out there.

Good ideas encourage people to go out and evangelize not destroy or kill or attack. The belief in the idea, in and of itself, is enough to make people go out … sometimes attack bad ideas, more often defend the idea and all the time presents the idea as some desirable thing that anyone in their right mind should want.

I have always believed that if you have a good idea, and you have people who believe in that good idea, you shouldn’t worry about competition or naysayers & doubters but rather focus all your energy on … well … showcasing the energy of the idea.

Now.

To be sure.

If you talk with enough people who have managed groups & companies and you will notice that at some point someone will bring up “I have to be a psychologist.”

To be clear.

Do business managers have to be psychologists to be effective? No. not really.

But playing the psychologist role on occasion certainly doesn’t hurt.

I am chuckling. I am fairly sure what I am discussing has some high falutin’ organizational behavior ‘management principles’ published and formal white papers with long esoteric discussions on employee personality types and some personality testing voodoo and lots of ‘how to energize organizations’ crap.

Anyway.

Most good managers clearly understand that different people are motivated by different things and that different things can inhibit the potential of each employee.

Suffice it to say, in my mind, once you move past trying to motivate a specific individual one-on-one it really all comes down to one basic management principle: the idea.

Simplistically every leader’s objective is always to free your employee to be their best and do their best. But sometimes this means stripping something away … and sometimes this means adding something … and it always means giving them something to believe in <not just do or ‘fight’>.

More often than not while you are leading your organization you invest gobs of energy focused on the pragmatic ‘here is what you need to do’ underpinnings crap which keeps everybody focused on the shit that keeps the doors open in the business every day.

But, at some point, you have to energize the attitude.

And that is where “idea” comes in. This isn’t really a vision … this is the idea of who and what the company is and the ‘belief’ which is kind of the unseen glue which makes “one, out of many.”

This idea is a heuristic management tool because while leading people certainly can contain some aspects of ‘enthusiasm management’ one of the most basic leader self-survival techniques you learn <or you will die> is how to manage without too much investment of self. Therefore I have always viewed “the idea” as the compass AND engine for the true potential of the organization.

Yeah.

As a manager you always hunker down on the pragmatic aspects of what needs to be done first.

Always.

It is kind of your heuristic trick to assess any attitudinal challenges to getting the frickin’ pragmatic aspect done.

But you always keep an eye, and an ear, open during the pragmatic ‘whether the shit will actually get done … and done as well as it can be done’ for the employee’s, and organization’s, idea ‘belief factor.’

And while Belief can come in all shapes & sizes & behaviors one thing remains constant … make the idea tangible and anyone can see it <rather than have it be some nebulous thing they have to define in their own heads>.

And it can get even tricky.

Tricky because the same employee who was bursting with blind belief one day will be the same employee sitting in front of you the next day discussing a completely different project or task … semi-frozen in ‘belief doubt’ or ‘belief confusion.’

Look.

The fundamentals of effective management are pretty much the same everywhere.

Therefore, we tend to lean on “us versus them” and “we are at war” to create some sense of “we must defend this idea” rather than instilling the idea, of the idea itself, as having value even in times of ‘non-war.’

Ok.

I imagine I wrote this not to offer any “how to” guide to anyone. I wrote it because I just saw someone aggressively and darkly outline a world in which the business idea was under attack and attempted to drive belief in the idea through ‘threat’ rather than ‘inner belief.’

And as I watched I thought “this person has no idea how to articulate an idea in a way that the idea itself exudes energy in and of itself.”

As I watched I thought “this person doesn’t understand that ideas don’t need enemies to be meaningful and powerful … believing in something is power in and of itself.”

Look.

I have different expectations for different levels of leaders and I certainly understand that when presenting or communicating things you gotta deal with what is in front of you and get shit done and get the best out of your employees. And sometimes you do whatever it takes in the context of the situation.

But.

And this is a big but.

A business cannot always be at war in order to justify, and formalize, the idea it believes in. The idea, in and of itself, should be good enough … and articulated well enough … to be powerful enough for people to just believe in it.

I am not suggesting this is easy … but that is what separates a good leader from a crappy leader …the ability to make the most of an idea by fanning the tiny, inner sparks of possibility into flames of achievement.”

I imagine my real point is we should all be wary of the leader who can only articulate an idea through an ‘us versus them narrative’ or a divisive tone.

“It’s more interesting to ask the question about America itself, not the America of Trump or the America of Obama, but what is today the appetite of the Americans, really, to have an active role in the world affairs?”

———–

French Ambassador Gérard Araud

=====================

“A person’s a person, no matter how small.”

―

Horton Hears a Who!

=======================

So.

I almost called this the shrinking of America.

What I mean by that is America is shrinking in the eyes of the world.

That said.

Let me begin by framing this from a business perspective.

Business leaders are responsible for the growth of their business on a number of dimensions not just $’s.

You can only hold on to your position for so long if you are having some economic success but the company brand and image is suffering.

You can also only hold on to your position for so long if you are having some economic success but the board views it as a poor long term strategy.

You can also hold on to your position for so long if you are having some economic success but perceptions of your leadership are not very good.

But that’s business <and we assume anyone who rises to a business leadership position knows this … as they should>.

I say that because a business can grow in a variety of dimensions not just profit & sales … there is also strategy, positioning and leadership. And if people start to doubt your business on any of those dimensions it is kind of like a balloon … they become little pin pricks and your ‘balloon’ starts shrinking.

And that is what is happening to America from a global perspective.

Pinpricks in the American balloon.

The pinpricks are doubts … in leadership, reliability, consistency and … well … civility <note: I could have added intelligence but I will not>.

This Pew study examined global attitudes toward America since Obama left office and Trump has assumed the leadership role. Suffice it to say … it is really tough reading for any American.

On all attitudes America is shrinking.

The only places in which Trump’s numbers rose versus Obama are … uhm … Russia <which rose a staggering 43 points, 11% to 54% confidence>and Israel. And, I would note, that despite the common perception Obama was loathed by Israel, Obama’s confidence ratings varied from 49% to 71% during his administration as compared to Trump’s current 58%.

Just to drive a nail into this particular coffin a little deeper … if I were to pull Russia and Israel out of the study … uh oh … confidence in America would drop into the teens <gulp>.

6 months into a Trump presidency and the pace and the depth of the decline driven by Trump’s leadership, or lack thereof, is stunning. Trump’s belligerent style and immature substance is not only affecting his approval scores domestically … but also internationally. He currently wears the mantle of “shrinker in chief.”

Whether one believes in the accuracy of polling or not, and not many sane people doubt PewResearch> the consistency between domestic numbers and international numbers should make anyone and everyone take a moment and pause.

I could even argue the domestic numbers only look better than international numbers because Republicans are stubbornly hanging on to Trump despite having some serious doubts. If I were in the Trump White House I would be eyeing this Pew report and thinking “yikes, this is my floor here in the USA <22% or the teens>.”

We are shrinking.

And it is sad.

Now.

Trump supporters will flippantly suggest they don’t care about what other countries think about Trump & the USA because it just doesn’t matter.

And it really matters if there is a lack of alignment between perception & reality as well as domestic attitudes & perceptions and international attitudes & perceptions.

That matters because alignment is what makes countries, and businesses, effective AND efficient. It eliminates the herky jerky of misunderstanding and the slowing inherent in having to overcome any negative aspects which could be obstacles.

Yes.

Alignment is important.

Any sane business leader knows that sustainable success is not found in some transaction or some event or even being viewed positively by some others <here & there>. They know success inevitably begins and ends in internal alignment.

Instead of promoting American leadership & unity, Trump is leaving a vacuum internally, domestically, by stubbornly gripping onto a minority view with regard to what people want and what is actually best for the country long term.

This gets exacerbated by the fact he is doing so within his own management team as well as within his ‘employees’ <the citizens … all … even the ones who did not vote for him and did not vote>.

In addition.

An “every man for himself” attitude doesn’t really encourage a positive transaction relationship but rather it encourages a sense of chaos … which leaves Trump and the US with fewer friends and less influence.

I have said it before and I will say it again … this is solvable. And it is solvable not through transactions but rather by … well … internal <domestic> alignment. Trump often argues that words don’t matter and behavior is more important.

If Trump were to triple down NOW on building unity domestically, it would go a long way to stopping the shrinking of America <note: but I seriously doubt something like this is within his DNA>.

Finally.

The deal.

Negotiating.

Or the art of the deal as a leader.

It seems his single-minded pursuit of individual challenges or countries does not translate to the complex politics of … well … the EU, China, Russia, the Arab & Muslim world, or anywhere.

As a result, the “best” dealmaker is starting to look like he cannot make a deal.

Sure.

He can complete some transactions <albeit they all seem to be about getting paid to arm the rest of the world with as many weapons as possible> but transactions are not ‘deals.’ NAFTA is a deal. The TPP was a deal. We have trade deals with people. These are not “let’s make a deal for this space” but rather a more complex web of multiple variants in which over time the variants will … well … vary and yet the ultimate outcome overall is positive.

That’s not his kind of deal.

And, frankly, that’s not the kind of ‘deal’ other countries truly desire.

But Trump’s dealing and his character are so intertwined it is almost like a Gordian knot.

That matters as we discuss shrinking.

PewResearch, who makes every attempt to be unemotional and unbiased, said this in their report:

Confidence in President Trump is influenced by reactions to both his policies and his character. With regard to the former, some of his signature policy initiatives are widely opposed around the globe.

Trump’s character is also a factor in how he is viewed abroad. In the eyes of most people surveyed around the world, the White House’s new occupant is arrogant, intolerant and even dangerous. Fewer believe he is charismatic, well-qualified or cares about ordinary people.

Look.

The truth remains that the US economy, just as it was with Obama, has remained mostly healthy and Trump has not to date significantly altered any signs of the health. The end of the Obama economic era and the start of the Trump economic era represent an ongoing good, not great, economy.

This is good.

But as I noted initially … economic success is just one dimension and while a powerful dimension you can only hold on to your position for so long if that is the only ‘positive benefit’ you are offering your organization as a leader.

Trump is a myopic bully and, just as with almost every bully, I worry America will remain large in physical stature but small in everything else.

In the end.

I brought up alignment and shrinking for a reason. Alignment is a double edged sword.

Positive alignment greases progress.

Negative alignment can suffocate and squeeze.

And that is my point on the current shrinking of America.

Poll numbers showcase directional negativity which is difficult to ignore … especially since the numbers reside in both domestic and international framing.

Call it perceptions or call it reality … I don’t care.

As long as it exists America will continue to shrink.

And ignore the most recent PewResearch at your own peril because it sure as shit looks like we are shrinking.

“Blaming others is an act of refusing to take responsibility. When a person can’t accept the fact or the reality, they blamed another person or the situation instead of taking accountability.”

―

Dee Dee Artner

=================

“For every King is right in his own eyes and rests the blame to whoever he wishes to carry it.”

―

Auliq Ice

===================

So.

Delegating.

While I could argue delegating is one of the most difficult things you learn to do as you move up in an organization <and one you MUST learn or will inevitably fail>, accepting responsibility, blame or accolades, is a whole different discussion and an entirely different learning challenge.

I know.

I know.

That sounds odd even as I type that. You would think no one actually has to learn to accept responsibility for their … well … responsibility. But all you have to do is look around the hallways of any management floor and some leaders in the public eye … and you will see a shitload of people who seem to have actually mastered the skill of placing blame on whoever they wish <other than themselves>.

Regardless.

I would say that the difference between delegating and accepting responsibility can be captured in two key words — learn versus accept.

You have to learn how to delegate.

You have to accept responsibility.

Here is a truth. No one, and I mean no one, has to learn how to accept responsibility … you either accept it or you do not.

And to explain the ‘accept’ part let me remind everyone of “double joys and halve the griefs.” What I mean is that you learn to double down when accepting responsibility for ‘blame’ or failure … and you only accept half the responsibility, at most, on the successes and accolades. In other words … good leaders halve the griefs <if not accept all> to those you delegate to and double the accolades for those you delegate to.

That is the basic “good formula.”

But some people want zero the grief and 100% the joy.

These are the quasi- leaders who authorize people to do things not out of good delegation but rather to distance themselves from any decision that may create a less-than-positive outcome.

Shit. No. Double shit.

There may be nothing more heinous in leadership management acumen than the delegation of responsibility with the intent to absolve one from potential negative outcomes.

All potential repercussions get sifted first and foremost through the hands of the one who has now been authorized.

In other words … that crappy leader handed someone some rope to potentially hang themselves with.

Setting my bitching & disdain aside I have to ask why some run away from this responsibility.

Well.

I will admit that making mistakes was a shitload easier years ago when I was a young whippersnapper attempting t move up in the business world. Bosses were fairly forgiving of mistakes and you learned that accepting responsibility for the bad as well as the good not only didn’t harm you but actually helped you grow as a person.

In today’s business world, shit … in the world itself, forgiveness isn’t that normal. Mistakes become opportunities to fire someone, demote someone or, in general, torture them. And while in the good old days your mistakes became hallway whispers and break room gossip today your mistakes become facebook posts, email chains and twitter memes.

What this teaches people is … well … assuming responsibility for a mistake has disproportionate consequences and doesn’t really help you grow as a person.

The way up, or to survive, seems to be somewhat dependent upon disproportionately shirking responsibility for the errors and disproportionately accepting responsibility for the successes.

It’s kind of the worst of both aspects.

In a past post I mentioned …‘accountability in today’s business world is stuck in the sludge at the bottom of the business moral barrel.’

I believe accountability for decision making in business is either nonexistent or far too random to be considered standard operating procedure.

To be clear <part 1>.

This is not about someone holding you accountable. This is about you holding yourself accountable especially when no one is holding you accountable.

To be clear <part 2>.

Today’s business world is strewn with cowards.

I know that sounds harsh but not only do people fear being accountable in general … they are absolutely scared shitless to be accountable for indirect consequences … being accountable for anything beyond the obvious cause & effect.

It is cowardly behavior.

And it gets worse in my eyes when I google search ‘integrating accountability in business.’ almost everyone discusses in some form or fashion the need to ‘clarify what it means to be accountable.’

WTF.

This is crazy to me.

Accountability for decision making, to me, equates to a some sense of fearlessness bred within an organization … fearless in terms of making mistakes <and not being overly chastised for doing so> and fearless in terms of a ‘doing what is right’ mentality.

All that said.

Organization culture or not … people don’t need someone to define accountability … or honoring commitments or any of that crap … people just need to assume responsibility accountability as part of who they are and how they act.

Holding yourself accountable is nothing more than following through with YOUR commitments and responsibilities whether you have authorized someone or delegated or any other excuse some of these cowardly leaders use to distance themselves from any real consequences.

Look.

We are responsible for our actions – all of them.

We are responsible for our inaction – all of them.

We are responsible for the repercussions of our actions & inactions – even the unintended results.

We are responsible for our thoughts and the behavior attached to them.

We are responsible for our mistakes.

And, yes, we are responsible for the actions & inactions of the people we have authorized shit to or delegated to.

Interestingly … an author Linda Galindo argues that the only true accountability is “personal accountability” and the only way to achieve it is to take responsibility for the outcomes of your choices, behaviors and actions – to the level of 85% of everything you touch or are associated with.

I could debate the 85% but as far as the intent I couldn’t agree more.

This seems like a hard thought for many in business to not only grasp … but accept.

Why?

I could provide an excuse by suggesting in a world where it seems like collaboration is the standard operating procedure and tasks are delegated in a fragmented fashion <often under the guise of ‘specialists should work only on their specialty’> the actual outcome has been impacted by so many hands it is difficult to tie it to one hand, let alone the leader decision maker, directly.

This means many business people want to avoid assuming responsibility for others actions … or maybe better said … they don’t want to be accountable for something they didn’t have 100% ownership of.

This is really silly thinking.

No.

This is cowardly thinking.

Uhm.

Here is the good news.

People who have personal accountability are happier, more respected and more successful professionally.

People who have consistent accountability actually increase the likelihood that they WILL get some credit for indirect positive consequences.

So if you can fight your way thru the doubts in being accountable in certain situations and fight your way thru systems which seem to crucify you for mistakes and accept the responsibility… you will end up in a better place – as a person and professionally.

And you also get the satisfaction of laughing at all the cowardly assholes you see mumbling excuses, shifting responsibility and ultimately doing whatever they can to avoid any blame for the mistake/missed deadline/project gone wrong. The ones who are quick to point the finger at anyone and anywhere but themselves.

Yeah.

I will admit. Some of those ‘blameless assholes’ are really slick when it comes to accountability and personal responsibility.

They vocalize responsibility … with caveats.

They accept positive accountability for anything that has any appearance of clear cause & effect … wrapping it all up with anything that doesn’t have clear cause & effect and deflect negative accountability results with a flick of an “I authorized them to do it.”

They seek to have 0% griefs and 100% joy.

They are fucking cowards.

==

“We must reject the idea that every time a law’s broken, society is guilty rather than the lawbreaker.

It is time to restore the American precept that each individual is accountable for his actions.”

―

Ronald Reagan

==

This is about personal responsibility and personal choice.

If you do not dare to do what is right then … well … it is cowardly behavior.

==

“Manliness consists not in bluff, bravado or loneliness. It consists in daring to do the right thing and facing consequences whether it is in matters social, political or other.

Doing what is right and accepting responsibility & accountability should be required behavior of our leaders and shouldn’t be celebrated … it should just be expected.

Me?

I believe no one should have to hold me accountable for my actions & responsibilities.

No one but me should set whatever standard I set for myself.

Look.

All jobs carry the burden of some responsibility. I don’t care if you are the most junior maintenance person or the most senior person in the world. And if you have some responsibility you will also have the burden of accepting responsibility for what you do, what you may have asked someone to do and even some shit that wasn’t done <but would have been within your purview if it had been done>.

Real fatherhood isn’t anything like a greeting card. We all screw up. Here’s to all the dads out there who show up & try again. #FathersDay

==================================

“I suppose in the end it’s almost too easy to look back and say what you should have done, how you might have changed things. What’s harder – what’s much, much harder – is to accept what you actually did do.”

In a world where we seem to be more and more focused on winning it is nice to step back and maybe realize that many things can be considered a victory other than some simplified “win” … especially for fathers.

How does this sound for what could be considered a ‘win’? Showing up … and showing up again … and then showing up again.

I am not a father but as I have applauded fathers year after year <because most of my father friends are great fathers> I am not sure I have applauded the most simplistic aspect of being a parent – the persistent attempt.

I think this topic matters.

It matters because when asked … I imagine almost every parent can fondly remember “the wins”, even if they are few and far between, with regard to their children. But maybe we should be pointing out the attempts, the persistency of their parenting attempts, rather than just the wins … the victories. And while the victories must be an incredible source of pride <that their attempts in parenting actually paid off in some way> their real pride source of being a parent, a father, is more likely to be found in the persistent attempts.

The persistent attempts? The times you fell short in some way in not only your child’s eyes but also how you may have fallen short in what you believe is the responsibility of parenting, and, yet, you attempt to do what is right the next day or the next time or the next opportunity.

There should be victory found in getting up and trying to do a little better the next time – victory in the attempt.

Look.

All fathers will be a jerk on occasion and, I imagine, some are simply jerks. But all fathers are imperfect. As I noted in a non fathers day post back in 2013 <No Perfect Fathers >. Shit. We all are. And, yet, imperfect or not … 99% of us persist and attempt again.

I will say this.

In our ‘positive reinforcement world’ in which ‘everyone contributes and should be included’ we tend to give out more gold stars than a second grade class.

I sometimes think we give out so many rewards that no one can truly tell who the ‘best of the best’ really are.

Oh.

I will say this except in parenting.

In parenting we have more of a tendency in never giving out a gold star for the attempt but rather solely for some achievement attained.

Therefore there is less positive reinforcement for the attempts and more for the achievements.

Well.

That seems fucked up to me.

====

“Not in the clamor of the crowded street, not in the shouts and applause of the many, but in ourselves, are triumph and defeat.”

–

Longfellow

===============

I am not suggesting fathers need more gold stars or that achievements don’t matter but it seems kind of fucked up to me that being a ‘perfect father’ is somehow always supposed to be attached to some achievements attained by the child.

Similar to my view on many things in life I believe more often than not success should be measured in progress not achievement.

Fathering is the same to me.

And that is why victory in the attempt matters so much. Persistent attempts are metaphorically like being a border collie to your child’s life … herding them attempt by attempt toward some progress path. If you view it that way you will most likely look back at dozens of “wins” in the herding and not just whatever destination you may attain in achievement.

That is most likely the closest I have ever come on fathers day of saying something similar to what the senator said.

And I would suggest ‘victory in the attempt ‘is a derivative of the thought I shared that day.

Fathers have a natural tendency look back at missed opportunities and moments where they failed … and maybe even when they were a jerk.

Maybe they should look back upon all the attempts and … well … think about the fact they showed up. And maybe that is a “win” in and of itself. And they certainly should be viewing attempts within a “37 seconds, used well, is a lifetime.”

It is quite possible this is a Life lesson for all of us, but for today, it is a Father’s Day thought.

Happy Father’s Day <and thank you Ben Sasse for making me sit down and wrote today>.

===================

“America’s about new beginnings, and the end of your story has not been written.

Happy Father’s Day to all the fathers out there who want to show up and try again.”

“You are a worm who thought himself a serpent just because you slither.

But your power was not real, Pliny.

It was all a dream. Time now to wake.”

—–

Pierce Brown

=============

So.

I would guess that most of us have run across a slitherer in business <let alone Life>.

A business slitherer?

Yeah.

One of those people who seem to slither in and around and as close to the edge of what is legal, ethical or right but never seems to cross any particular line far enough that someone can say unequivocally they have done something criminally wrong.

A slitherer slithers through all the same things most of us in business and in life do but does it in a way that seems corrupt <although it may not be>, seems illegal <although it may not be>, seems unethical <although it may not be> and seems inappropriate <although it may not be too everyone>.

That is the characteristic of one who slithers through Life.

—–

“seems.”

——-

“Seems” taints everything they do and, well, everything we do. A slitherer figures out a way to be held to a slightly different standard which ‘seems’ wrong but no one can point to any real specific criminally wrong behavior.

And it always helps to have someone defend you and somehow the one who slithers almost always has supporters. Those supporters mostly rally around the quasi-indefensible behavior because a slitherer is a proven survivor. And, yes, in a world in which surviving attrition may actually be a key to success … a persistent survivor can be viewed as an attractive ship to tie your line to <even if it is a ship of dubious lineage>.

But maybe the worst thing about someone who slithers their way to whatever success they gain is the team that ends up surrounding them.

Although I am no real prize for any boss … I would never work for a slitherer – my ethical and moral compass steers me too far away from any “seems wrong” behavior to make a position like that viable for me — or, I imagine, for a slitherer boss.

=============

“Round and round they went with their snakes, snakily…”

―

Aldous Huxley, Brave New World

============================

My point on that is slitherers seek slitherers. It is a weird type of loyalty. It isn’t really loyalty to the person it is more loyalty to the fact you can behave in a way that ‘seems’ inappropriate on occasion but ‘seems’ okay to your boss <if not even applauded>.

Sigh.

That said.

We do not fire people for being seemingly unethical behavior or seemingly clueless behavior or seemingly inappropriate behavior. Appearance of behavior just makes people feel uncomfortable but it is typically not a fireable offense … it is just offensive.

And, yet, a slitherer thrives in the seemingly offensive behavior. They thrive because as their seeming behavior shrinks them in some ways it also grows their ability to slither around the edges of true illegal, true criminal, true unethical to do what they want to do the way they want to do it.

To be clear.

A good day for a slitherer is different than a good day for most of the rest of us.

Good to them is a “win”, or some version of successful outcome> done ‘their way’ of which no one can point to any specific wrong doing or completely unethical behavior <which, to them, is a type of success in and of itself>. Their ‘good win’ doesn’t have to actually contain any of what most of us would consider ‘good’ to be considered success.

To be clear.

Most good organizations foster a culture which tends to expel slitherers. Good cultures which foster moral & ethical behavior tend to avoid slithering close to any lines and therefore tend to treat slitherers as a virus to the organization itself.

I do worry, on occasion, that the good slitherers <which is actually an oxymoron> survive in any organization and are constantly trying to infect the organization itself <and, given the right circumstances, actually can take over an organization>.

I wrote this today because it has been sitting in my draft folder for a long time as an organizational behavior business piece … and now I can point out that our president is a slitherer.

He slithers through all the same things most of us in business and in life do but he does it in a way that seems corrupt <although it may not be>, seems illegal <although it may not be>, seems unethical <although it may not be> and seems inappropriate <although it may not be too everyone>.

Just watch. Trump will slither his way in and out of any seemingly illegal, corrupt, unethical event he places himself in. That is what a good slitherer does. And, yes, good slitherer is an oxymoron … but in a way President trump is also.